1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates generally to the field of behavior modification of animals. More particularly, the present invention relates to an improved device and technique for controlling animal behavior by emitting a positive audio stimulus in conjunction with a negative audio stimulus for more effective training. The present invention also relates to using a hand-held electronic training device that provides consistent audio tones, both positive and negative, to aid in the training of domestic animals.
2. Description of the Related Art
Nearly every owner of the 100 million dogs and cats in the United States would like for their pet to be better trained but often can not afford to have it done, don't know how to do it themselves or won't spend the time. Moreover, most pets, at least some of the time, have difficulty understanding what their trainers expect of them. As a result the training process can be long and filled with error.
Shocking devices of various kinds are well known in animal training. For instance, cattle prods find use in navigating cattle traffic. Other shock devices are used to wean calves and train horses. U.S. Pat. No. 4,539,937 by Workman describes a horse training collar which delivers a controlled shock to the horse as it's neck muscles expand during cribbing. U.S. Pat. No. 4,947,497 by Farkas describes a dog barking collar that produces a low shock at the onset of barking which increases in intensity if the dog continues to bark in order to distinguish between "watchdog barking" and "nuisance barking." The obvious drawback to electrical shock treatment is that it is often considered repugnant and cruel.
Negative audio stimuli have been used as a more humane alternative for animal training. Many dog collars have been designed to emit an unpleasant sound in response to a dog's undesirable behavior. For instance, the "PeaceMaker" (trademark) dog collar by Humane Technology, Inc., College Station, Tex. produces a single high-intensity sound burst with a decrescendo pattern shortly after detecting the dog's bark while ignoring extraneous sounds of brief duration. U.S. Pat. No. 4,180,013 to Smith describes a collar which responds to barking by emitting a high frequency noise and mechanically vibrating the vocal cords of the dog. U.S. Pat. No. 5,061,918 to Hunter discloses a sound emitting collar which adjusts the sound intensity according to the previous behavior of the animal and also varies the sound pattern to avoid habituating the animal to the sounds.
Remote communication with animals is also known in the art. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,336,530 to Sloan et al. discloses a directional finding system for hunting dogs with a transmitter attached to a collar and a remote receiver which enables the trainer to locate the dog. U.S. Pat. No. 3,589,337 to Doss discloses a collar which administers a shock to a dog in response to a remotely transmitted signal. U.S. Pat. No. 4,202,293 to Gonda et al. discloses a dog collar with a sound emitting buzzer and shock terminals as well as a remote control which can activate the buzzer either alone or immediately followed by a light shock. U.S. Pat. No. 4,745,882 to Yarnall, Sr. et al. describes a device that administers a mild shock or unpleasant noise to a dog as it approaches the walls of a confined area. U.S. Pat. No. 4,766,847 to Venczel et al. also administers a shock to a dog as it approaches a predefined boundary but gradually increases the shock as the dog nears the boundary and continues the shock after the dog crosses the boundary. U.S. Pat. No. 4,967,696 to Tobias discloses a dog collar containing a receiver which emits a simple tone or a human voice upon being actuated by a remote transmitter. U.S. Pat. No. 5,054,428 to Farkus discloses a dog collar which can be actuated by a remote transmitter to apply a short duration shock to get the animal's attention and well as a more intense shock if the animal fails to conform to expected behavior.
The inherent disadvantage of the aforementioned prior art is that these devices provide only negative stimulation whereby the animal must either obey and respond properly or be punished. Positive feedback between the trainer and the animal is usually limited to voice and physical contact (petting) with neither being the primary means of training. It should be appreciated, however, that basic training theory centers on the animal learning signals for "YES" and "NO". These are most often taught through a series of rewards and punishments. Moreover, trainers often fail to effectively train their pets because they are not consistent in the positive reinforcement (reward) and punishment that they impose on the animal. For efficient and speedy training of animals it is usually necessary to deliver not only a consistent and immediate negative stimulus (NO command) but also a consistent and immediate positive stimulus (YES command).
Positive reinforcement devices which avoid resorting to injury or abuse are known in the field of animal training. U.S. Pat. No. 4,535,724 by David discloses a horse training apparatus mounted on a horse's neck which includes a storage tank filled a sweet liquid, a tube extending from the tank to the horse's mouth, a pump, a battery and a switch so that a trainer or rider can press the switch to pump sweet liquid into the horse's mouth. In addition a second identical set of equipment containing sour liquid can be mounted on the opposite side of the horse's neck so that the horse can be rewarded (sweet liquid) or punished (sour liquid). In the field of dog barking, U.S. Pat. No. 4,335,682 to Gonda et al. describes a dog collar which produces a first sound at commencement of a shock and a second sound when the shock is finished. A remote transmitter allows the user to generate the shock accompanied by the first sound when the shock begins and second sound when the shock ends, as well as the first sound alone or the second sound alone. In theory, the animal becomes conditioned to regard the first sound as a warning signal and the second sound invokes feelings of safety, relief and relaxation in the animal so that the trainer later can apply reward (second sound) and punishment (first sound) without the shock. A drawback to Gonda et al. is that the use of shock is mandatory in order to condition the dog.
The use of auditory stimuli in animal learning and training dates from before the classic works of Pavlov (1927) and Skinner (1938). See, for instance, I. P. Pavlov, Conditioned reflexes, London: Oxford University Press, 1927; and B. F. Skinner, Behavior of Organisms, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1938. In the subsequent years, auditory stimuli have been used as rewards, inhibitors and discriminitive stimuli in learning studies in a variety of species, including dogs and cats.
Another point to consider is the consistency of the level of the punishment. Most owners find it difficult to be consistent when disciplining their pet. Usually, too much of the owner's personal state of mind gets in the way. Furthermore, many of the previously discussed training devices by design administer inconsistent punishment. This inconsistency can confuse the animal and considerably lengthen training time.
Therefore, despite the availability of numerous positive reinforcement devices and punishment devices for behavior modification of animals, there is still a need for a humane training device that provides the consistent messages necessary to let the animal know when it is behaving correctly as well as incorrectly.